Fox News "Sunday Morning Futures" - Transcript: Interview with Rep. Jim Himes

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BARTIROMO: Welcome back.

House Democrats, with their new oversight powers, preparing a number of investigations into President Trump, with articles of impeachment against the president even reintroduced -- reintroduced on the House floor.

Joining me right now is Connecticut Democratic Congressman Jim Himes. He sits on both the House Intel and Financial Services Committee. He is also chairman emeritus of the New Democratic Coalition.

So, it's good to have you on the program this morning. Thanks so much for joining us.

REP. JIM HIMES, D-CONN.: Good morning, Maria.

BARTIROMO: What are your priorities in terms of oversight?

HIMES: Well, Maria, as you know, I mean, this is a -- this is a constitutional issue, right?

The Congress is there to provide oversight of the executive branch. And there's a lot out there. Donald Trump's administration has given us a lot to look at.

But I'll give you one example. I'll give you two examples. One is foreign. The president tweets that we will be out of Syria in 30 days, no questions asked, right? That's a lot of money. That's a very different way of operating in the Middle East.

But now his secretary of state and the national security adviser, John Bolton, are saying, no, we're going to be there until every last Iranian boot is out.

Those are two contradictory statements coming from the same administration. The representatives of the people and the people in this country who pay for those missions have a right to know what the truth is.

And then you have got Scott Pruitt at the EPA. There's -- who had to leave because of misbehavior. We will be looking into those kinds of things, as the Constitution would have us do.

BARTIROMO: Do you think that we should withdraw from Syria?

HIMES: You know, I will tell you, I'm not a fan of this president, but I have always liked the fact that he is instinctively skeptical of having our troops on the ground in the Middle East.

I don't think anybody wants a repeat of what happened in Iraq. I wouldn't have done it the way that President Trump did. I think we have got to protect our Kurdish allies. I do think we have got to be in a position to push back against the Iranians and the Russians.

But, look, over time, I think we should be trying to reduce the number of Americans on the ground in places like Syria and Iraq and Afghanistan, rather than increase those numbers.

BARTIROMO: OK, so that's exactly what the president is trying to do.

Let me move on to your role on the Intel Committee, sir, because we have covered this a lot for the last year-and-a-half. And we know that there was real FISA abuse, where the FBI didn't tell the FISA judge who paid for the dossier, that it was a political document, et cetera.

Are you going to pursue that? Are you going to seek the truth there?

HIMES: Maria, that's -- that's not accurate. And I have looked at every single one of the FISA affidavits.

BARTIROMO: What is not accurate, sir?

HIMES: That the Justice Department in any way misled the judge.

I understand that that's the Republican talking point, but that's simply not accurate. The FBI...

BARTIROMO: No, no, no, no, I didn't say -- I didn't say misled. They didn't tell the judge that the Democrats paid for the dossier. That's a fact.

HIMES: Yes, they did. They noted that this -- that the dossier had been done for political purposes to find adverse information on Donald Trump. So, again, that's just not accurate.

They complied with their own -- with their own procedures. And an inspector general report determined that there had been no misbehavior there.

But of course we're going to continue to look at this.

BARTIROMO: The judge said he did not know Hillary Clinton paid for the dossier, Congressman.

HIMES: So, when you make a FISA application, you don't name American citizens or American entities ever.

BARTIROMO: It was the other candidate in the election.

HIMES: This is why we have the president being referred to as...

BARTIROMO: It was his opponent in the election. You don't think that should have been pointed out, that it was Hillary Clinton who paid for the dossier, Congressman?

(CROSSTALK)

HIMES: Maria, no.

It is a violation of Department of Justice procedures to name Americans or American entities.

BARTIROMO: Even though his opponent paid for the dossier?

HIMES: Maria, let's take a big step back here.

What is the one thing that the FBI did prior to the election? Jim Comey of the FBI, while there were investigations of Hillary Clinton and of Donald Trump on, announced to the American people twice, not once, but twice, the investigation of Hillary Clinton.

This idea that, prior to the election, Jim Comey or the FBI or the Department of Justice was working against Donald Trump is exactly upside- down.

BARTIROMO: Actually, it was Peter Strzok. It was Peter Strzok.

HIMES: Jim Comey and the FBI probably...

BARTIROMO: I think you knew that.

HIMES: We had never even heard the name Peter Strzok. Jim Comey...

BARTIROMO: But it was Peter Strzok.

HIMES: ... announced to the American people...

BARTIROMO: But it was Peter Strzok who presented the dossier. Whether you -- whether the American people heard of the name before or not, that's the individual who presented it.

(CROSSTALK)

HIMES: Yes, but you know that nothing in the dossier has been disproven. Not a single thing in that dossier has been disproven.

You know that Jim Comey announced to the American people...

BARTIROMO: Jim Comey himself said that it wasn't accurate. Jim Comey himself said that later.

HIMES: No, no, no, he didn't. He said that it was raw intelligence, which is what it was.

But, again, we're losing the forest for the trees here. Jim Comey probably handed the presidential election to Donald Trump. So, this idea that the FBI and Jim Comey somehow were working hard against Donald Trump is just absurd on the face of it.

BARTIROMO: Let me ask you something, Congressman, because I have got these -- this report here that you and your colleagues have said that you have hard evidence of collusion between the president and the Russians.

Are you going to tell us what that hard evidence is?

HIMES: What report is that? I have not seen that report. And I don't believe that we do have hard evidence of collusion. I'm not sure what it is you're referring to.

BARTIROMO: You have said -- the committee has said you have more than circumstantial evidence of collusion, circumstantial evidence of collusion.

Where is that circumstantial evidence?

HIMES: Circumstantial? There's far better than circumstantial evidence.

We have the president's son inviting Russians to Trump Tower and asking them for help in the election. We have the president himself saying, Russia, please find these e-mails. We have four or five senior Trump administration and campaign officials who are going to jail for lying about their contacts with Russia.

And we learned in the last 48 hours, of course, that the FBI was concerned that the president might have actually been working, wittingly or unwittingly, for the Russians.

So, I don't know what your definition of circumstantial is, but that's...

BARTIROMO: Knowing the activity -- knowing the activity on the left, Congressman -- let's be honest here.

We know Tony Podesta, John Podesta's brother, worked actively to stop the administration, then the administration, from putting sanctions on Russia and Ukraine. We know that Hillary Clinton worked with Russians in terms of that dossier.

Are you going to pursue that circumstantial evidence, the way you have -- you say you have this circumstantial evidence?

I only bring this up, Congressman, because this has been a circus of this constant talk of collusion in the zeitgeist, and we still have yet to see any real evidence.

So, at some point, the American people need some honesty.

HIMES: Well, first of all, I don't think you can point to a single example of dishonesty out of the Mueller investigation.

I can point to lots of people who are going to jail.

BARTIROMO: No, but you said you have circumstantial evidence that Donald Trump colluded with the Russians. I have not heard it yet. I would like to hear the facts.

Are you just saying that to put it out there in the zeitgeist, so everyone's sort of thinking, well, maybe, maybe not? But the truth is, there's nothing, and there hasn't been anything for a year-and-a-half, Congressman.

HIMES: Oh, OK, let me try one more time.

The president's son invited Russians to Trump Tower and asked them for help. The president asked Russia for help.

BARTIROMO: Actually, I believe the story is, is that they contacted Donald Trump Jr. He didn't contact them. They contacted him.

HIMES: So, you have now twice asked me the question. Do you want to hear me answer it, or...

BARTIROMO: Yes, please, go ahead.

HIMES: OK.

So, the Trump Tower meeting, Trump publicly asking, Trump firing Donald Trump, by his own admission, because it was lifting pressure from the Russia investigation.

Maria, how many of the president's people are now going to jail or under indictment for lying about contacts with Russians? Why do you lie about contacts with Russians if you have got no reason to?

BARTIROMO: The indictments -- the indictments have nothing to do with collusion. You know that.

When you look at Manafort and what -- what he's done, it's about tax evasion. It's about things that happened before this period. So you're mixing things up, and you know it.

HIMES: No.

(LAUGHTER)

HIMES: No, I'm not.

So, if Michael Flynn and George Papadopoulos and Paul Manafort and three or four others are lying about their contacts with Russians, does that not raise certain questions in your mind?

BARTIROMO: I would just like you look at both sides, Congressman. You're not looking at both sides.

HIMES: Why would everybody be lying about contacts with the Russians?

BARTIROMO: I think the American people deserve that.

I hope you will come back soon to finish the conversation. Thank you, sir.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source